I would LOVE to see Hammy, Alonso and Kimi and Seb in the same car though! If I had to pick one, I'd also side with Alonso. I'd put Hammy 2nd and Kimi 3rd but it wouldn't surprise me if Kimi could surprise us.

When I reckon Alonso would beat Vettel in same-cars (say Red Bull-Renault) I assume Fernando would have to have had some time in the team and that he could then race at his peak; same with Hamilton. What the OP is asking is comparative driver ability.

I don't think Vettel or Hamilton would win as many races as Alonso in same-cars; it would be more like Senna-Prost in 1988-9: the wins would be close, but I'd put money on Alonso to score the most. He is not as emotional/temperamental as Seb and Lewis. This is not to dismiss SV and LH, just that imo they would rate as Hakkinen did against Michael S or Rindt vs Stewart: slightly below.

I don't think there is any question that Seb would beat Alonso and Button at Red Bull. Kimi and (a focused) Hamilton would be more of a challenge, and while I imagine Vettel would likely edge it, it is really too close to call.

Oh please, bourbon, stop with affecting to be in some community of privileged wisdom with Ashley and others of his persuasion. Every time you make some statement like such and such a supposed dictum will "fall by deaf ears" you are insulting whatever portion of the forum would dissent from Ashley's assertion had they registered it, which likelihood you are so enthusiastically doubtful of occurring. If that is your intention, by all means be my guest as I don't at all believe that a forum should be a place of civility as the mods and many of our Kumbaya posters would have it.

By the way Ashley, it was about time for an avatar change. Of course, discerning readers would be able to ascribe any of your posts to the author proper without that or any identifying features other than the quirks of veiled partiality which are your writing trade. Notice how he overextended himself with calling out Hamilton's post-2007 championship place record, following on that to state that Hamilton was an eschewed article as far as the collective pocketbooks of the f1 garages bar Mercedes' are concerned and that this was a direct index of the esteem in which he is held by the various team principals. Then with the abruptness of cowardice or the good hearing bourbon wishes for all our constituency (as a cowing argument was being leveled at him loud and clear) he, a person yet fairly on the attack, proceeded to back-peddle, after the most modest of factual rebuttals by lamo and others (citing the place finishes of senna and Prost in the 80s among other things) into stammering (figuratively) that 'hey that was a different time and place, things don't translate la di da di da' to save his dignity. The funny thing is, and forgive this digression, that him and others of his ilk (I refer to mcnader, johnston and so on) are quick to trot out the newly furbished point aggregate argument vis-a-vis Jenson and Lewis without asking themselves a couple of very simple questions whose answers would have brought them a measure of perspective in the midst of their polemical zeal. How many of the frequenters of this forum can name, off the top of their head, how many race wins or pole positions Michael Schumacher has or for that matter those of any other formula one drivers? Now how many of these same people can recall how many career points the drivers in question have totaled? Though this is hardly common knowledge I myself know Schumacher holds 91 wins and 68 poles, Vettel 26 and 36, Alonso, 30 and 22, and so forth, but I couldn't offer how many points any of them have tallied if it meant my life. The first number (of capable individuals) frankly dwarfs the latter. When Schumacher broke down at that televised press conference was it because he had passed Senna's record for points? No? I thought not. Now why is that? Because points is the flimsiest, least permanent, least translatable, and least comparative measure in f1. Can f1 drivers place points on their household mantle top and shine them for the occasional visit by the in-laws, pawn them for money when they are hard by like Bjorn Borg almost did with his Wimbledon trophies some years past? When you are trying to quickly establish the caliber of an f1 driver to a motorsport amateur do you say "check it out, so-and-so accumulated 1000 points throughout their racing career!' there is no immediate impact to such a statement. But to say that "so and so had 20 or so race wins" helps to quickly locate them in the pantheon for the auditor. And, this is a more temperamental matter and so I understand completely when many thinking posters diverge from me on the matter but podiums are in a way a semi-ignominious statistic to cite in pride. One of the things I admire about Hamilton is that of course he wants and is slowly modifying his racing approach to collect as many podiums as possible when nothing better is competitively achievable but deep down he looks on them with the kind of wry attitude that implies a sort of ethos of self-reproach on earning them reasoning 'if I was good enough to secure a third or second place position then I was good enough to win the race and should have even by actively courting a completely penurious outcome by thoroughgoing efforts to get an ultimate victory; only if I never was in with an opportunity should I be content with whatever place I could salvage; another one of these in hand is nothing to smile about'. But you get the sense that Button puts an inordinate amount of pride and stock in the acquisition of mere podiums, the psychology of an also-ran and while he isn't one himself a mentality to which I feel Alonso has fallen prey as of late and sadly to his detriment. Say what you want about Vettel but he does understand this is a winners league not a playing the percentages league. In basically only a fifth of the season he turned his championship chances around by getting WINS. Who won the championship this year? The person with the most wins. The championship as we've come to understand it for the last 20-plus years asks a very straightforward thing of any aspirant. You generally have to win at least 4 or 5 races and then mix it up properly for the rest of the season. When, the styled arch-cerebral Prost was tussling with senna he took care to usually win five or six races on the year. But see Alonso talking about maximizing his points and thinking he can hold on with a three win season when a truly maximizing approach hunts for WINS. If I was his coach I would almost tell him not to directly think about the championship at all but to get back to the level of expectation he had with Renault and even McLaren. I actually think that counter to prevailing opinion on the subject spending too much time in inadequate and midfield cars (which is what Alonso has been doing for most of his post-McLaren career) works to dull your self-expectation such that at critical junctures when you are positioned to take a win you are less capable of doing so simply by dint of the prospect no longer obtaining in one's mind as a thing that MUST for one's sense of self-respect be accomplished. If Alonso can even just get five wins next year I'm pretty sure the rest of it will take care of itself, even if Vettel is able to win seven. So, to bring my thread back to the points aggregate argument, if button partisans wanted to land a blow they would really have to summon statistics regarding championships and wins and poles none of which flatter their picked man. What sort of real racer has less poles than years he has been in f1, with every year from 2009 to now certainly being paired with a car capable of them? To say that speed isn't the only thing that makes a great racer is merely true, and vexingly banal being a known truth to us all and so not worthy of being uttered to a community of one's peers. But to act like speed isn't a primary component, amounting almost to a majority of what is required is disingenuous. Trying to elevate Button (and current Kimi, too) to the status of the f1 triumvirate does him a disservice. To unnerve Vettel you have to be able to do two things consistently and have the second one follow off the first: Be able to outqualify him or near him, and be able to snatch a victory from him on equal ground or put him in the shade on equal ground (sorry Mark but that disqualifies you well... off the Mark! ooh how it tickles me when a pun falls in my lap). A race like Korea shows how useless a Webber not on one of his pet tracks can be at parlaying a qualifying advantage (albeit a slim one) into a race advantage over his teammate. He ends up 8 seconds behind Vettel there from pole whereas Vettel puts him 13 behind in India in a contrasting position. Deep down Vettel and we all know that Hamilton is pretty much the only one on the grid that Vettel can put in a good lap against in qualifying and still be beaten for pole and vice versa. And if Singapore had played itself out to the end without the retirement I think we would have seen Hamilton maintain his lead on Vettel to the flag, an eventuality very suggestive to interpretation when brought together with what did actually happen in Austin. Again and again over the years we have seen Hamilton gain a distinct type of win over the Red Bulls. I guess you could call it a win for bragging rights or a calling card win, a species that intrinsically has nothing perhaps to recommend itself but one that does I think carry psychological consequences. A species that Button is peculiarly lacking in. Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves. We think of Vettel as basically a qualifying and pole to flag monster. But the pressure of delivering against Hamilton in Q seemed to have him faltering at Singapore when he had shined in all the run-up sessions. A pole to flag triumph was foiled at Canada and Austin. In Germany 2011 Hamilton basically rained on the homecoming and hopeful home-win of the new champion. In China 2011 he again won a close quarters contest with Vettel. Meanwhile for Button, Brazil 2012 was a wash as far as the possibility of some meaningful competition with Vettel was concerned. In Belgium, Vettel didn't make q3 and so was too far away for them to come into competitive conflict. In Australia the performance difference between the McLaren and the Red Bull decided things too much at that stage in the game. In Japan 2011, however much losing out came to rankle Vettel (going by his admission in the press lead-up to the 2012 race he had already all but sewn up the championship (only needed a point I believe) which changed the nature of his driving. In Singapore 2012 I thought we were provided with a little-remembered situation from which to judge of Button's mettle in contesting things with Vettel. After Hamilton's retirement Button got to where he was basically breathing down Vettel's neck and then, whether it was through a failure of desire and derring-do as I incline to think, or some less damning reason more sympathetic spectators would care to supply he basically gave up the chase and resigned himself to second. Even when others win a grand prix in which Vettel happened to participate rarely are the narratives of those races as personal in the nature of their competitive involvement with Vettel as they are with a fair many of Hamilton's. And strange enough while the championship was touted as a contest between Vettel and Alonso, which it literally was, they too had little meaningful competition on track this year. They could have almost been racing at different tracks, so compartmentalized from each others' were their races at each venue—a lot of this being due to the performance gap of the cars. Perez in Malaysia alone had more significant on track competition with Alonso then Vettel dd. Now the thing I'm talking about is an affair of very tenuous sensations and perceptions but I can't help but delude myself that certain other people harbor a similar take on events and would welcome their contributions of opinion. I think when historians look back on this era of f1 and try to characterize the nature of the contest, and the players, Hamilton will play a more considerable role than he currently does though if he never sees his way through his coming Mercedes years to the holding of another championship it may only be the role of inspired occasional foil (note how I didn't say occasional inspired foil).

To conclude with my dressing down of a certain someone: When people ask Ashley to enumerate the driving errors that Hamilton made during the 2012 season he offers none but opts for some general comment to the effect of 'well everyone had misfortunes befall them etc. etc. but some persons 'namely my boy, wink wink' get the job done anyway'--a bald evasion. He then tries to diffuse the opposition he had provoked in making the extent of some of his true feelings clearer earlier by finally centering his reservations with Hamilton on an area that is strictly outside of his functions as a driver. To finally have to rest his criticism of Hamilton on a calling into-question of his administrative capacities is a duck and a defeat.

2010 Singapore was Webbers fault.Hamilton has also lost due to reliabillity a 2nd place at Barcelons & 3or 4th place at Hungary,2 faulty gear boxes at Japan, caused a grid drop & a gearbox failur during the race.McLaren lost out in the development race 2nd half of 2010.

Balancing out 2007 & 2012? what a big nonsense

so what you are basically saying is, when it goes good it's hammy. When it goes bad it's everyone elses fault.

For example. Did you expect Webber to teleport out of Lewis' way? where was Webber supposed to go? Turn into the wall?

As for Development in 2010. How do you lose out in development but still finish on the podium beating two of your competitors one in the same car as the race winner ?

Webber overshot the corner, had outbraked himself he had no chance to make the corner if he did not use Hamiltons car as "brake" He would have turned into the wall without Hamilton.

Mclaren delayed the upgrades from Silverstone with the new EBD , while Ferrari & RBR managed to run it earlier, wich gave them an advantage

when you have someone keeping you tight on entry you have to take a wider exit. Basic geometry. Webber could not have made the corner where Hammy turned in.

One race delay whoop de do and Ferrari never got their EBD working right anyway. Even in 2011 they didn't get it right. So no real big loss there. For a team left behind in development. They even managed a 2nd in Silverstone without the EBD. In Monza they managed to get a close second behind Fred and in front of the RBR. And two podiums in the final race. Sorry butthe reults do not indicate being left behind in the development race, especially when they are finishing infront of the cars out developing them.

M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?

Oh please, bourbon, stop with affecting to be in some community of privileged wisdom with Ashley and others of his persuasion. Every time you make some statement like such and such a supposed dictum will "fall by deaf ears" you are insulting whatever portion of the forum would dissent from Ashley's assertion had they registered it, which likelihood you are so enthusiastically doubtful of occurring. If that is your intention, by all means be my guest as I don't at all believe that a forum should be a place of civility as the mods and many of our Kumbaya posters would have it...

Being the more complete or faster driver (or even 'better' driver if you want to regard it that way) doesn't automatically translate to winning a teammate battle. Look at Button vs Hamilton over the course of their time at McLaren. I think there's very few people who would say that Hamilton isn't the more talented and faster driver, but over the course of 2011 Button had him firmly in the shade. Also look at Alonso vs Hamilton in 2007. IMO Alonso was a much more complete and at that point 'better' driver than Hamilton but Hamilton matched and technically beat him. A driver's ultimate capability is not always reflected because within the work environment circumstances will play a part including the dynamic, relationships within the team, the style of the car.

In giving my answer I am assuming a Red Bull along the lines of what we have seen for the past few years.

I don't think Alonso would beat Vettel at Red Bull. Alonso's big weakness is that when he feels he's getting beaten, particularly by a teammate he starts to self-destruct. Red Bull would not be prepared to give him #1 status, which IMO would affect him mentally and Vettel would be at least a match for and beat him at some points. Vettel on the other hand is not affected by this so over the course of the season I believe he would overall have the edge. I also think that Vettel is one of the best qualifiers on the grid and he's brilliant at maintaining position when he's at or near the front so that would assist him against Alonso as he'd frequently start ahead of him and be able to maintain that position.

Hamilton and Vettel IMO are very similarly matched on speed so qualifying would be a tussle between them in much the same way as it has been between Webber and Vettel, although even closer. They're also similarly competent and aggressive overtakers, although in different ways. IMO it would depend on whether Hamilton can maximise the performance of the Red Bull in the way that Vettel does and I'm genuinely not sure about that because I don't know if he likes a planted rear end. In the alternative scenario that the Red Bull lacked that planted rear end such as it did at the beginning of 2012 Hamilton might have the advantage, but again I'm not sure because Vettel may adjust and take a step forward as I have witnessed him do when faced with other challenges.

I'd actually put my money on Raikkonen being the driver most likely to beat Vettel in the Red Bull. He is consistent and a great racer and is less impetuous on track without compromising his overtaking so Vettel would really have to iron that out and not pick up silly penalties or get into silly tangles. He can race at the front and through the field. Although his qualifying in the past year was not on Vettel's level, Raikkonen has in the past shown himself to be an exceptional qualifier. IMO it would depend on whether that changed - if it did then Raikkonen could have the edge; if it didn't I'd give the edge to Vettel. I'd also note that Raikkonen excelled performance-wise in the Newey McLarens.

But as per my opening paragraph that is not to say I think Raikkonen > Vettel/Hamilton > Alonso.

Exactly.

For the last few seasons Vettel/RB has been the package to beat. Not only because the RB has been one of the best cars, not only because Vettel can deliver as a driver, but because the combination is formidable. I also think that Kimi would be the one challenging Vettel. With Hamilton the next contender.

M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?

I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.

Well Di Resta beat him in lower formulae so I'm sure he would fancy his chances. I somehow don't see many drivers beating him as a team mate though as Vettel has stepped up incredibly during his time in F1.It would all depend on the car, but even if he was beaten in a non-Rocketship, I don't think it would be by much. The boy can drive well, the boy can drive very well.

_________________"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

Oh please, bourbon, stop with affecting to be in some community of privileged wisdom with Ashley and others of his persuasion. Every time you make some statement like such and such a supposed dictum will "fall by deaf ears" you are insulting whatever portion of the forum would dissent from Ashley's assertion had they registered it, which likelihood you are so enthusiastically doubtful of occurring. If that is your intention, by all means be my guest as I don't at all believe that a forum should be a place of civility as the mods and many of our Kumbaya posters would have it.

By the way Ashley, it was about time for an avatar change. Of course, discerning readers would be able to ascribe any of your posts to the author proper without that or any identifying features other than the quirks of veiled partiality which are your writing trade. Notice how he overextended himself with calling out Hamilton's post-2007 championship place record, following on that to state that Hamilton was an eschewed article as far as the collective pocketbooks of the f1 garages bar Mercedes' are concerned and that this was a direct index of the esteem in which he is held by the various team principals. Then with the abruptness of cowardice or the good hearing bourbon wishes for all our constituency (as a cowing argument was being leveled at him loud and clear) he, a person yet fairly on the attack, proceeded to back-peddle, after the most modest of factual rebuttals by lamo and others (citing the place finishes of senna and Prost in the 80s among other things) into stammering (figuratively) that 'hey that was a different time and place, things don't translate la di da di da' to save his dignity. The funny thing is, and forgive this digression, that him and others of his ilk (I refer to mcnader, johnston and so on) are quick to trot out the newly furbished point aggregate argument vis-a-vis Jenson and Lewis without asking themselves a couple of very simple questions whose answers would have brought them a measure of perspective in the midst of their polemical zeal. How many of the frequenters of this forum can name, off the top of their head, how many race wins or pole positions Michael Schumacher has or for that matter those of any other formula one drivers? Now how many of these same people can recall how many career points the drivers in question have totaled? Though this is hardly common knowledge I myself know Schumacher holds 91 wins and 68 poles, Vettel 26 and 36, Alonso, 30 and 22, and so forth, but I couldn't offer how many points any of them have tallied if it meant my life. The first number (of capable individuals) frankly dwarfs the latter. When Schumacher broke down at that televised press conference was it because he had passed Senna's record for points? No? I thought not. Now why is that? Because points is the flimsiest, least permanent, least translatable, and least comparative measure in f1. Can f1 drivers place points on their household mantle top and shine them for the occasional visit by the in-laws, pawn them for money when they are hard by like Bjorn Borg almost did with his Wimbledon trophies some years past? When you are trying to quickly establish the caliber of an f1 driver to a motorsport amateur do you say "check it out, so-and-so accumulated 1000 points throughout their racing career!' there is no immediate impact to such a statement. But to say that "so and so had 20 or so race wins" helps to quickly locate them in the pantheon for the auditor. And, this is a more temperamental matter and so I understand completely when many thinking posters diverge from me on the matter but podiums are in a way a semi-ignominious statistic to cite in pride. One of the things I admire about Hamilton is that of course he wants and is slowly modifying his racing approach to collect as many podiums as possible when nothing better is competitively achievable but deep down he looks on them with the kind of wry attitude that implies a sort of ethos of self-reproach on earning them reasoning 'if I was good enough to secure a third or second place position then I was good enough to win the race and should have even by actively courting a completely penurious outcome by thoroughgoing efforts to get an ultimate victory; only if I never was in with an opportunity should I be content with whatever place I could salvage; another one of these in hand is nothing to smile about'. But you get the sense that Button puts an inordinate amount of pride and stock in the acquisition of mere podiums, the psychology of an also-ran and while he isn't one himself a mentality to which I feel Alonso has fallen prey as of late and sadly to his detriment. Say what you want about Vettel but he does understand this is a winners league not a playing the percentages league. In basically only a fifth of the season he turned his championship chances around by getting WINS. Who won the championship this year? The person with the most wins. The championship as we've come to understand it for the last 20-plus years asks a very straightforward thing of any aspirant. You generally have to win at least 4 or 5 races and then mix it up properly for the rest of the season. When, the styled arch-cerebral Prost was tussling with senna he took care to usually win five or six races on the year. But see Alonso talking about maximizing his points and thinking he can hold on with a three win season when a truly maximizing approach hunts for WINS. If I was his coach I would almost tell him not to directly think about the championship at all but to get back to the level of expectation he had with Renault and even McLaren. I actually think that counter to prevailing opinion on the subject spending too much time in inadequate and midfield cars (which is what Alonso has been doing for most of his post-McLaren career) works to dull your self-expectation such that at critical junctures when you are positioned to take a win you are less capable of doing so simply by dint of the prospect no longer obtaining in one's mind as a thing that MUST for one's sense of self-respect be accomplished. If Alonso can even just get five wins next year I'm pretty sure the rest of it will take care of itself, even if Vettel is able to win seven. So, to bring my thread back to the points aggregate argument, if button partisans wanted to land a blow they would really have to summon statistics regarding championships and wins and poles none of which flatter their picked man. What sort of real racer has less poles than years he has been in f1, with every year from 2009 to now certainly being paired with a car capable of them? To say that speed isn't the only thing that makes a great racer is merely true, and vexingly banal being a known truth to us all and so not worthy of being uttered to a community of one's peers. But to act like speed isn't a primary component, amounting almost to a majority of what is required is disingenuous. Trying to elevate Button (and current Kimi, too) to the status of the f1 triumvirate does him a disservice. To unnerve Vettel you have to be able to do two things consistently and have the second one follow off the first: Be able to outqualify him or near him, and be able to snatch a victory from him on equal ground or put him in the shade on equal ground (sorry Mark but that disqualifies you well... off the Mark! ooh how it tickles me when a pun falls in my lap). A race like Korea shows how useless a Webber not on one of his pet tracks can be at parlaying a qualifying advantage (albeit a slim one) into a race advantage over his teammate. He ends up 8 seconds behind Vettel there from pole whereas Vettel puts him 13 behind in India in a contrasting position. Deep down Vettel and we all know that Hamilton is pretty much the only one on the grid that Vettel can put in a good lap against in qualifying and still be beaten for pole and vice versa. And if Singapore had played itself out to the end without the retirement I think we would have seen Hamilton maintain his lead on Vettel to the flag, an eventuality very suggestive to interpretation when brought together with what did actually happen in Austin. Again and again over the years we have seen Hamilton gain a distinct type of win over the Red Bulls. I guess you could call it a win for bragging rights or a calling card win, a species that intrinsically has nothing perhaps to recommend itself but one that does I think carry psychological consequences. A species that Button is peculiarly lacking in. Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves. We think of Vettel as basically a qualifying and pole to flag monster. But the pressure of delivering against Hamilton in Q seemed to have him faltering at Singapore when he had shined in all the run-up sessions. A pole to flag triumph was foiled at Canada and Austin. In Germany 2011 Hamilton basically rained on the homecoming and hopeful home-win of the new champion. In China 2011 he again won a close quarters contest with Vettel. Meanwhile for Button, Brazil 2012 was a wash as far as the possibility of some meaningful competition with Vettel was concerned. In Belgium, Vettel didn't make q3 and so was too far away for them to come into competitive conflict. In Australia the performance difference between the McLaren and the Red Bull decided things too much at that stage in the game. In Japan 2011, however much losing out came to rankle Vettel (going by his admission in the press lead-up to the 2012 race he had already all but sewn up the championship (only needed a point I believe) which changed the nature of his driving. In Singapore 2012 I thought we were provided with a little-remembered situation from which to judge of Button's mettle in contesting things with Vettel. After Hamilton's retirement Button got to where he was basically breathing down Vettel's neck and then, whether it was through a failure of desire and derring-do as I incline to think, or some less damning reason more sympathetic spectators would care to supply he basically gave up the chase and resigned himself to second. Even when others win a grand prix in which Vettel happened to participate rarely are the narratives of those races as personal in the nature of their competitive involvement with Vettel as they are with a fair many of Hamilton's. And strange enough while the championship was touted as a contest between Vettel and Alonso, which it literally was, they too had little meaningful competition on track this year. They could have almost been racing at different tracks, so compartmentalized from each others' were their races at each venue—a lot of this being due to the performance gap of the cars. Perez in Malaysia alone had more significant on track competition with Alonso then Vettel dd. Now the thing I'm talking about is an affair of very tenuous sensations and perceptions but I can't help but delude myself that certain other people harbor a similar take on events and would welcome their contributions of opinion. I think when historians look back on this era of f1 and try to characterize the nature of the contest, and the players, Hamilton will play a more considerable role than he currently does though if he never sees his way through his coming Mercedes years to the holding of another championship it may only be the role of inspired occasional foil (note how I didn't say occasional inspired foil).

To conclude with my dressing down of a certain someone: When people ask Ashley to enumerate the driving errors that Hamilton made during the 2012 season he offers none but opts for some general comment to the effect of 'well everyone had misfortunes befall them etc. etc. but some persons 'namely my boy, wink wink' get the job done anyway'--a bald evasion. He then tries to diffuse the opposition he had provoked in making the extent of some of his true feelings clearer earlier by finally centering his reservations with Hamilton on an area that is strictly outside of his functions as a driver. To finally have to rest his criticism of Hamilton on a calling into-question of his administrative capacities is a duck and a defeat.

I don't think any would. Maybe alonso playing the long game over a season by being more consistant. But given that any of them would quali close on the grid. One of Vettels main skills is those first few laps. Somewhere and some how he gets more confidence and a better feel for the car with the full load on.

So even if his team mate quali'd in front of him on the front row. I would fully expect that skill set to give him the lead and pull out the distance to control things before his team mate got the feel for things.

I would agree that the latter-2012 Vettel woul have been hard to beat.

But I think Alonso (and probably Hamilton) would already have had a substantial points lead over Seb by that point.

[quote="breathemyexhaust"]Oh please, bourbon, stop with affecting to be in some community of privileged wisdom with Ashley and others of his persuasion. Every time you make some statement like such and such a supposed dictum will "fall by deaf ears" you are insulting whatever portion of the forum would dissent from Ashley's assertion had they registered it, which likelihood you are so enthusiastically doubtful of occurring. If that is your intention, by all means be my guest as I don't at all believe that a forum should be a place of civility as the mods and many of our Kumbaya posters would have it.

Some drivers have been able to overcome poor reliability, team mistakes, and weak car performance to still finish in the top 3.

LOL.

I don't know why you think that's so funny. Let's look at 2012. Lewis had a couple of mechanical failures, a couple of pit stop mistakes, and the team cocked up his fuel once, with a car that was generally quickest at most rounds. Sebastian had a couple of mechanical failures, pit stops that were, on average, a couple of tenths slower than the McLaren guys, and the team cocked up his fuel once, in a car that was quickest at maybe 6 or 7 races. Fernando had good reliability, and solid work from his team, but had a car that was only the best 1 or 2 weekends, and sometimes quite far from the best while his rivals were never worse than 2nd or 3rd quickest. Kimi was in a new team, with pit stops consistently quite far from the top teams, a lot of practice time spent running parts they never raced, a bunch of really awful strategy calls, and a car that was only super quick a few times. If Lewis had contract drama to distract him, then Sebastian and Fernando had constant parts legality scandals, politicking over who is each other's biggest competitor, and general mind game nonsense to distract them as well. Sub Kimi's race rustiness in for drama on his end. Yes, some had more luck than others, but I think on balance they all had fairly equal negatives/stumbling blocks/resistance/obstacles...and we know in which order they finished the season.

As final points - getting the most from your team, which helps minimize mistakes on their end, improves efficiency, and keeps energy levels up which is just good for everything, is part of being a good title contender, and so is putting yourself in a team where you can do that. Being able to manage your career or work with people who can manage your career to give you the best possible chance to succeed is part of being a title contender.

It's like your trying to win an award between you and vettelmessi.

I think we better ring up Oxford Dictionairy and tell them to they need to change the definition of a couple.

Of the top of my head, there was atleast 4 messed up pistols. Two at bahrain, monaco, Europe + slower ones after that. Mechanical failures Japan, Korea, Singapore, Dubai, ChinaDidn't fuel him enough when he was clearly dominant.Puncture dropping him way further back then any driver could of made upMaldonado Driving into him, wouldnt of been there if it wasn't for pitstop errorGrosjean knocking him out first cornerHulkenburg knocking him out.I can go on about smaller things like mclaren not warning Lewis of the positioning of over cars in monaco. Bad safety car timings etc, though everyone gets those small things.

I would happily have a long debate on you where we look at every race, I bet you if we look at every race and took away the mechanical problems, you'll find Hamilton would of won the WDC this year. I have no doubt about it, and I have no doubt it would be by a big enough margin to be able to admit that although we don't know what would have happend if he hadnt of has these problems, he would of clearly won if he didn't with no doubt.

You can tell me if your happy to do that, we can eve start a topic for it where I can show all the calculations etc.

This.

breathemyexhaust wrote:

By the way Ashley, it was about time for an avatar change.

Hahah this one got me cracking

Last edited by a.rellum on Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

In Australia the performance difference between the McLaren and the Red Bull decided things too much at that stage in the game.

Why, because Vettel beat Lewis in a slower car? To turn down Sebastians achievement splitting the McLarens that day is not correct IMO.

I saw that as more of a compliment to Vettel in the context of things. He was speaking in regards to Button vs Vettel and was indicating that the Mclaren was too quick for Vettel to catch in the end, so we couldn't really see a proper Button vs Vettel fight.

In Australia the performance difference between the McLaren and the Red Bull decided things too much at that stage in the game.

Why, because Vettel beat Lewis in a slower car? To turn down Sebastians achievement splitting the McLarens that day is not correct IMO.

Remember the safetycar and the rotten pitstop that ALLOWED Vettel too get ahead of Lewis...? Geuss you did huh...

Rotten pitstop?

McLaren did two pitstops on the one lap and quick smart too.

The timing of the safety car screwed Lewis and the amount of time under yellows driving to the Delta compared to Vettel. Nothing to do with length of time in the pitstop. Lewis just had to do a slower lap due to the Delta than Seb who had more of the lap completed before full course yellow due to not pitting.

But I guess points like that get lost because McLaren always screw Lewis.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

No, I don't think he would. Beaten? Maybe. Owned? Hardly.

_________________"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

I'm sorry but no. Button is an excellent driver and he may not be as quick as Hamilton but he still has some excellent victories where he has genuinely outraced Hamilton. For example, Aus 12, Spa 12, Japan 11. He has excellent car control when it comes to being on slicks on a damp track as seen in races such as, Aus 10, Canada 11, Germany 12 and Brazil 12.

Too diminish his championship year as mediocre is utter tosh as well. He had the best car for 6 or 7 races at the beginning and made it count, the Brawn GP car then fell behind on development due to lack of funding and other times finally started to get to grips with the DDD, which meant Jenson had to fight for the rest of the year and when he won in Brazil, oh boy did he fight for that.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

I'm sorry but no. Button is an excellent driver and he may not be as quick as Hamilton but he still has some excellent victories where he has genuinely outraced Hamilton. For example, Aus 12, Spa 12, Japan 11. He has excellent car control when it comes to being on slicks on a damp track as seen in races such as, Aus 10, Canada 11, Germany 12 and Brazil 12.

Too diminish his championship year as mediocre is utter tosh as well. He had the best car for 6 or 7 races at the beginning and made it count, the Brawn GP car then fell behind on development due to lack of funding and other times finally started to get to grips with the DDD, which meant Jenson had to fight for the rest of the year and when he won in Brazil, oh boy did he fight for that.

Did he ever! Brilliant race, watched it in a hostel in Melbourne, I was the only one there, cheering away haha.

_________________"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

[b]No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. [/b]This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Plain rubbish, the car is designed too be fast out of corners and be grippy, If you would put Hamilton in the same car he would need no less than a couple of practice sessions too get the hand of it. I would like too ad Alonso and Kimi too that list too.

Vettel did not dominate Webber, Webber is just not that good of a driver as lets say Ham or Kimi. And too say the reason he did was because the exhaust blowing was at it most advanced is just utter utter bollocks.

OMG deal with the psychological pressure of being up against Vettel...hahaha dont make me laugh they would both dominate him in that Newey car.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

I'm sorry but no. Button is an excellent driver and he may not be as quick as Hamilton but he still has some excellent victories where he has genuinely outraced Hamilton. For example, Aus 12, Spa 12, Japan 11. He has excellent car control when it comes to being on slicks on a damp track as seen in races such as, Aus 10, Canada 11, Germany 12 and Brazil 12.

Too diminish his championship year as mediocre is utter tosh as well. He had the best car for 6 or 7 races at the beginning and made it count, the Brawn GP car then fell behind on development due to lack of funding and other times finally started to get to grips with the DDD, which meant Jenson had to fight for the rest of the year and when he won in Brazil, oh boy did he fight for that.

Aus 12 - Lewis had two horrible pitstops and then got lost postition too Seb after the sayfycar.... Spa 12 - Uhm have you forgot Grosjean taking out Lewis, Kamui and Alonso in corner 1?

Wow these people think they can make stuff up too suit their agenda. Please get your factss straight and dont ignore important events like the first corner pile-up wich made jb's day again a lot easier without the two best drivers on the grid. Canada 2011 ring any bells..?

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

I'm sorry but no. Button is an excellent driver and he may not be as quick as Hamilton but he still has some excellent victories where he has genuinely outraced Hamilton. For example, Aus 12, Spa 12, Japan 11. He has excellent car control when it comes to being on slicks on a damp track as seen in races such as, Aus 10, Canada 11, Germany 12 and Brazil 12.

Too diminish his championship year as mediocre is utter tosh as well. He had the best car for 6 or 7 races at the beginning and made it count, the Brawn GP car then fell behind on development due to lack of funding and other times finally started to get to grips with the DDD, which meant Jenson had to fight for the rest of the year and when he won in Brazil, oh boy did he fight for that.

Aus 12 - Lewis had two horrible pitstops and then got lost postition too Seb after the sayfycar.... Spa 12 - Uhm have you forgot Grosjean taking out Lewis, Kamui and Alonso in corner 1?

Wow these people think they can make stuff up too suit their agenda. Please get your factss straight and dont ignore important events like the first corner pile-up wich made jb's day again a lot easier without the two best drivers on the grid. Canada 2011 ring any bells..?

Australia 12 - Jenson and Lewis come into the pit and Mclaren make a wonderful double stop and this does not affect Hamilton at all! The unfortunate safety car was the only downfall for Lewis that weekend and possibly the dodgy clutch settings at the start.

Spa 12 - Jenson was on fire all weekend, Lewis was struggling with the rear wings, they opted for the safe option and lost out. Going off his quali pace I highly doubt Lewis would have challenged Jenson at all that weekend, and I highly doubt Fernando had the car capable of challenging Jenson as well.

And in case you haven't noticed I'm a Lewis Hamilton supporter as well!!! I have no agenda in regards to Lewis and you'll be happy to know he's more of a favourite than Jenson but I still support JB!

Also in regards to Canada 11, the accident with LH and JB was 50-50, Hamilton shouldn't have made the move up the inside of Jenson and Jenson should have been more aware of what was happening behind him. The incident with Fernando I can't really remember so I won't give my opinion on it.

But please don't let your skewed up perception of events lead to you thinking I have an agenda.

[b]No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. [/b]This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Plain rubbish, the car is designed too be fast out of corners and be grippy, If you would put Hamilton in the same car he would need no less than a couple of practice sessions too get the hand of it. I would like too ad Alonso and Kimi too that list too.

Vettel did not dominate Webber, Webber is just not that good of a driver as lets say Ham or Kimi. And too say the reason he did was because the exhaust blowing was at it most advanced is just utter utter bollocks.

OMG deal with the psychological pressure of being up against Vettel...hahaha dont make me laugh they would both dominate him in that Newey car.

I see you've only recently signed on this forum but that's not a very polite way to start an discussion with someone who has just written a well argumented post.

Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.

Wrong. Suzuka 2011.

And also when was being able to keep it on the road when the other 'true wet' drivers are throwing it off and crying for inters considered a bad thing?

Granted...but thats ONE... his first win in Hungary all the topdrivers whereout, Kimi, Coulthard, Micheal, Filipe, saftycars amd crashed gave him that win. Canada 2011 he takes both Hamilton and Alonso out. Spa 2012 Alonso and Lewis out...There is defenitly a pattern too when he wins. In 2009 he had the best car by far.. That's mediocore.

The only ones who would completely destroy Vettel are Alonso and Hamilton. He would be owned. Hard

I'm sorry but no. Button is an excellent driver and he may not be as quick as Hamilton but he still has some excellent victories where he has genuinely outraced Hamilton. For example, Aus 12, Spa 12, Japan 11. He has excellent car control when it comes to being on slicks on a damp track as seen in races such as, Aus 10, Canada 11, Germany 12 and Brazil 12.

Too diminish his championship year as mediocre is utter tosh as well. He had the best car for 6 or 7 races at the beginning and made it count, the Brawn GP car then fell behind on development due to lack of funding and other times finally started to get to grips with the DDD, which meant Jenson had to fight for the rest of the year and when he won in Brazil, oh boy did he fight for that.

Aus 12 - Lewis had two horrible pitstops and then got lost postition too Seb after the sayfycar.... Spa 12 - Uhm have you forgot Grosjean taking out Lewis, Kamui and Alonso in corner 1?

Wow these people think they can make stuff up too suit their agenda. Please get your factss straight and dont ignore important events like the first corner pile-up wich made jb's day again a lot easier without the two best drivers on the grid. Canada 2011 ring any bells..?

Aus '12- Lewis forgot how to start and was beaten off the line by his teamate....showed no pace capable of challenging through the whole race, granted he lost 2nd to Vettel due to the safety car but how does that effect Button's victory?

Spa '12- Lewis was a full second slower than Button in qualifying and was well down the order, how can we possibly consider that he would have come into play during the race when Button looked utterly unassailable?

Also to try and devalue Canada '11 is utterly foolish, any drive in which a driver comes from last to first in twenty laps is nothing short of incredible. Granted Lewis and Alonso were both out of the race but once again, at no point during the race did they look like they had the pace to challenge for the lead so them being out of the race has no weight really. Button came alive in the second half of that race in conditions he is notoriously good in so how can we think that Alonso or Hamilton would have done better?

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

I wouldn't rule out a lot of what you said until I got to this part. I have never seen anything that suggests Hamilton adapts better than Alonso does. Quite the contrary in fact.